Перевод на русский пока недоступен; показана английская версия.
IREN Limited (Nasdaq: IREN) company deep dive, first edition. Two PDFs — Chinese (78 pp) and English (105 pp) — each with 16 chapters plus 4 appendices, 12 figures and 60 data tables, cell-for-cell consistent across the two versions; every computed number is derived in Appendix D. Data as of 2026-09-10; financials to 2026-06-30 (10-K filed 2026-08-27).
In twelve months the company turned itself from a bitcoin miner into an owner-operator renting out GPU compute: about $16.6bn of contracts signed, $10.9bn of GPUs ordered from Dell, two GPU-backed facilities (6.0% and 9.0%) and six convertible tranches. In the accounts the $16.6bn splits into two ledgers: $5.1bn under ASC 606 and in RPO, $11.4bn under ASC 842 as lessor operating leases and outside RPO; at 30 June 2026 GAAP AI cloud revenue was $70.5m for the quarter and lease revenue was zero. The report reconciles the four-rung ladder — contracted ARR, RPO, operating ARR, GAAP quarterly revenue — and lays the five-year GPU depreciation and the 5-year and 30-month debt terms on one timeline: this is an asset owner's business, and the cash has to come back faster than the GPUs depreciate and the debt matures.
What the report delivers
| Chapter | Specific result |
|---|
| 2, 3 | Filed readings for each rung of the ladder and how the two ledgers are split; the Microsoft SOW clause by clause (no termination for convenience, late delivery is not a material breach, prepayment offset schedule, the three-name change-of-control list); the Horizon 1–4 timeline; the four Dell orders and the parent guarantee |
| 4, 5 | The two GPU-backed facilities side by side (lenders price the customer's credit); one Horizon building's five-year account; the depreciation clock and the debt clock: stabilized cash EBITDA against debt service, and what is left after GPU depreciation |
| 6 | Of 5,610 MW announced, the roughly 40 MW actually billing AI cloud; what ERCOT Batch Zero "conditional base load" means for Sweetwater; the three power-price disclosures dropped from the FY26 10-K |
| 7, 8 | Segments quarter by quarter; impairments and held-for-sale; the net-loss-to-operating-cash-flow bridge ($1.84bn of customer prepayments); capex on two bases; debt item by item with maturities; six convertibles' conversion prices and capped calls; share count +52.7% in 13.5 months; the fully diluted table; capital commitments against deployable resources and a month-by-month cash ledger |
| 9 | 16-vote founder shares at three points in time; what pay is tied to; twelve months of insider transactions one by one; 13G filers against 13F holdings |
| 10, 11 | Three company types, three accounting treatments, eight peers on one basis; how many uncontracted GW-cycles the share price implies; consensus reconstruction, the options-implied distribution, short-interest structure and beta |
| 12, 13 | Two independent valuation paths (contract cash flows plus explicit value for 2027 capacity and the 2028 option; a multiples cross-check), a three-scenario price ladder, probability bases with ±10pp and ±30% sensitivities, an item-by-item reconciliation of spot to target; certainty layers, bull/bear comparison, scenario-to-action map, entry and invalidation conditions |
| 15, 16 | Eleven anti-misreading items; falsification conditions, the catalyst path with settlement direction, tracking indicators and the linchpin variable |
Audit and revisions
After drafting, two rounds of adversarial audit (financials and valuation / contracts, counterparties and governance / tradability / presentation and wording / ZH–EN consistency / a bull-case rebuttal) raised 172 challenges; 44 substantive revisions are published in Appendix C, Table 60. One deserves stating up front: the first draft's scenarios treated $5.9bn of cash both as a source of funds for capital commitments and as cash still on hand at the target date; after the first-round audit flagged it, the model was rebuilt on a month-by-month cash ledger and the rating and target were re-derived.
Sources and verifiability
Primary sources: SEC EDGAR (CIK 0001878848) 10-K, three 10-Qs, 8-Ks with exhibits (including the full Microsoft SOW, the Dell purchase orders and the GS/JPM credit agreement), DEF 14A, 11 Form 4s, 13G; XBRL companyfacts; ERCOT and PUCT public records; FINRA short-interest data; the Nasdaq options chain; peer comparisons from seven companies' latest filings. Every claim carries an [A]/[B]/[C]/[D] evidence grade; known limitations and data gaps are listed item by item in Appendix B.
How this report was produced, and disclaimer
Compiled independently by the TopX research team from public information, then reviewed and revised before release by professional investment managers and fund managers with asset-management experience. Reviewers take part in a personal capacity, do not represent their respective employers, and provide no investment advisory services through TopXEA; TopXEA holds no investment-adviser licence in any jurisdiction. Primary filings (SEC, exchanges, company disclosures) are the first-priority source, key figures require corroboration from at least two independent sources, claims carry [A]/[B]/[C]/[D] evidence grades, and known limitations are disclosed item by item inside the report. This is research content. It does not constitute investment advice and is not tailored to any particular investor; past data and forward projections do not indicate future results. Please note before purchase: digital goods are non-refundable once delivered.
